Governor Baker has received much credit for his vocal opposition to TrumpCare and national efforts by Republicans to repeal and replace ObamaCare with inhumane health care “fixes.” Unfortunately for Massachusetts residents, Governor Baker’s words are not reflected in his proposals to fix the Commonwealth’s health care problems.
His recent proposal to fix our health care crisis, H.3829, would push low-income people off MassHealth and into ConnectorCare or other commercial plans. Doing so would mean that low-income Massachusetts residents would have to pay more for their coverage while losing benefits. Retaining these benefits could save the state money in the long-run and prevent folks from ending up with crippling debt, not to mention the peace of mind and security that comes with having great health care.
After decades of debates on health care costs, we have all learned that regular access to preventative care is a sure-fire way to reduce health care costs. And we also know that the Governor – a health care policy expert after spending years as a health insurance CEO – knows that soaring costs are a drain on people’s quality of life, and on our state’s budget.
In spite of this knowledge, the Governor has decided to side with President Trump and Congressional Republicans by taking away access to cost- and life-saving services.
His health care proposal, a lighter shade of TrumpCare, would increase out-of-pocket costs for co-pays, kick more than 140,000 residents off Medicaid, and increase deductibles for hardworking Massachusetts residents. He has also proposed a 5-year moratorium on mandates, preventing people with rare health conditions from seeking relief.
Now, in a public statement, the Governor defended his proposal by stating that it is “designed to ensure that everyone who has coverage keeps coverage.” What he failed to mention is that coverage doesn’t mean access to affordable, quality services. It simply means that you have access in theory.
It’s like having a car, but not being able to afford gas, and the car has no seat-belts, and the brakes are squishy.
#CharlieCare is a poorly disguised attempt at scoring political points by pretending to care about fixing one of the most pressing issues of our generation. The Governor’s healthcare proposal does nothing to help fix our broken health care system. If anything, it would exacerbate personal debt and lack of access.
With this proposal, the Governor is asking us to play pretend, and it’s time for this Democratic-led legislature and the mainstream media to end our participation in his political theater.
We should not only reject this cruel attempt at political expediency, but also denounce the Governor for pushing to reverse a 10-year Massachusetts commitment to health insurance coverage expansion.
And then, we in this Democratic-led legislature should present our plan to fix the Commonwealth’s health care crisis.
It’s time for us to continue our proud tradition as the party of hardworking families, the party of bold and smart public policy. Let’s take a step forward by providing America with a blueprint to universal access to health care.
Let’s pass single-payer legislation in 2017 and make health care a human right in Massachusetts.
No.
If our argument is that it’s a right, then all Americans should get it, not just we happy few from the Commonwealth. Having it here while tacitly allowing other states to suffer undercuts the goal.
If we took this approach with marriage equality, we’d still be in the dark ages. Yes, all citizens of the USA deserve health care as a right, but it is not the obligation or jurisdiction of our state government to see to that. We can, and we must take the initial step to providing this right for the citizens of our commonwealth.
Reminder: We didn’t do anything on marriage equality. It was fought for in the courts.
????? We were the first state. We did not take the position to wait for all states and go together.
It was an SJC ruling in 2004. John Kerry was not ready for it (well, he thought the country wasn’t ready for it) and ran around muttering about civil unions.
We don’t need to look to marriage equality for an example. The ACA itself is a national rollout of a health care plan that started in Massachusetts. We were the first movers on universal coverage back when that was a radical idea, and can be first movers on single payer if properly implemented. . And since Partners already controls 80% of the market share (and a similar number of legislators)-why not just buy them out? Their valuation is $12 billion which is less than our annual expenditure on healthcare in the state*.
*16 billion this year, and likely not a good mathematical argument but you get my point
Now if Sen. Eldridge can cost out a serous proposal-maybe by working with Andy Slavitt and Dr. Berwick-then the legislature should consider it. If we can prove it cuts costs and pinches pennies maybe we can get Cheapskate Charlie to sign it.
Kerry was running for federal office. MAYBE he would have said something else if he were running for Governor. MA has historically led in so many areas: abolition, public education, child labor laws, universal health care, marriage equality, and even the Constitution itself. Yes, some of those were judicial rather than legislative, but so what? Either method is legitimate in a mixed constitutional republic.
Like I said, the better analogy is Romneycare which was adopted nationally as Obamacare. Why not pass Eldridge care (or would it be Setti care?) and see if that can go national?
Now in order to avoid Vermont, we have to be serious and we have to be honest.
CharlieScare is mini-me TrumpScare. It’s time for single-payer healthcare as a right for all. Here in the Bay State and all across America.
The beauty of the federal system is that states can get out ahead of the national government. We can simultaneously legislate within our borders and advocate that our congressional delegation fight for this nationally. Our state getting this does not inherently mean other states can’t; it’s not a zero-sum game.
The ACA is failing because of Market Failure and the Republican remedy is…..more markets. It’s time to stop the madness.
The ACA is suffering because the GOP relentlessly continues to lie about it.
I get your objection to “markets”. Nevertheless, “market failure” is deceptive at best.
If a vast right-wing conspiracy invested tens of millions of dollars in brainwashing tens of millions of Americans that Crest toothpaste CAUSED, rather than prevented, tooth decay, the market would cause sales of Crest toothpaste to slump. The resulting unpopularity of Crest would NOT be a symptom of “market failure”. If anything, it would be just the opposite.
I enthusiastically agree that single-payer government-sponsored health care is the only approach that can work. I enthusiastically agree that access to quality health care should be a right of a every American just as access to quality public education already is a right.
Your incorrect and deceptive attacks on “markets” hurts the cause we both embrace.
If health care is supposed to be “affordable”, as in the “Affordable Care Act”. that word “afford” has a meaning and it means the ability to purchase. If something has to be purchased, it is not a right. Markets are NOT the place for health care, full stop.
I understand your argument, this is not the first time you’ve made it.
My criticism is directed this comment:
First, I’m not even sure that the ACA is failing (that depends to a great extent on the benchmark used to measure success or failure).
More importantly, your comment incorrectly blames “Market Failure” for whatever shortcomings the ACA has. I’m not interested in going through another round of the argument about “affordable”. I already said I agree with you that health care is a right.
Nevertheless, this is most emphatically NOT what is happening to the ACA today. What is happening to the ACA today is that the insurers are increasingly reluctant to write policies, and are raising premiums, because the GOP is threatening to dismantle the regulations that allow those policies to be written.
That is not “market failure”, it is intentional harm the GOP is doing to tens of millions of men, women, and children.
This is market failure. The ACA is built on the foundation of private markets providing health insurance. The ACA is built on the foundation that health care is a product/service one must purchase and it is not a human right. Markets have failed us in this application. Insurers are companies with a fiduciary obligation to provide a profit to their shareholders as their top consideration when dealing with public health. That means public health takes a back seat corporate profits.
Markets are failing to provide public health.
How would this be different from what Vermont tried, and had to back away from because of the scale of the cost?
Great question CMD, it spawned my new thread.